novel wtc demolition thread

[FreeLancer]

"I can live with any of a dozen "truths" about 9-11, from official story to Chinese/Russian mafia, and they don't affect the bigger picture of what matters to me."

Apparently, so can everyone else.

[Maddy]

Nevertheless, it is important to know what is possible. I don't think anyone on the forum has any question that the demolition of the towers was possible. A more interesting question, to me, might be, was the collapse of the towers possible via the plane crashes alone?

Didn't I see somewhere here, at some time, there was a thread with a link to some You Tube stuff where a man went around and tried to figure out if what was said happened with the planes, really happened, and then if it were possible for the towers to fall due to that? Or was it the Pentagon? Might have been the Pentagon. But it was something along those lines, and his research showed that no, it wasn't possible.

See what a bad memory I have? >.< Now I have to find that or I'll go stark raving mad!

[leto]

The Twin Towers is the Red Herring while the Pentagon is the God Damn Holy Grail that no one seems to talk about.

There's no way in hell a novice pilot can pull the maneuver that they propose happened.

I showed a film recreation to an Air Force Pilot/Ex Airline Pilot and he had one word to say, BULLSHIT.

Not to mention there was an absence of Blow Back from the 9ft Rolls Royce Engine being at full 500 mph on the Cars and People supposedly watching it, which some in fact swear it was a Passenger Jet of some sort.

Let's not forget that the section of the Pentagon that was Slammed into was under construction for months before.

Let's not forget that there was over 40 camera's had an angle on the impact of the Pentagon and the only one that is out there is questionable at best.


Prove that what happened at the Pentagon is not as it seems and you have the fertile ground to pontificate all you want on the Twin Towers.

[chump]

[quote="dbcooper41"]so back to our story;

Hey. I'm sorry. Your response to my post was a little disappointing. Considering the title of this thread I thought I was on topic. Let me just say one more thing:Although it is almost certain that conventional demolition techniques like explosives and thermite (thermate) were used on the towers, the many explosions and the molten steel were evidence of that, I have to consider that the energy neccesary to pulverize all that concrete was extraordinary. Look at all that dust!

Mini-nu**s have been dicussed. I'd bet that physcists have learned to work with those, controlling the yield and direction of energy, by now. There is evidence, toasted cars and large holes in the surrounding buildings and streets, that high energy particle beam weaponry could have been used. I don't know where they got the power. Considering all of the reasons that this happened in the first place, I think we may agree that the perps didn't want to leave anything to chance that the buildings would not come down.

If Tesla's little handheld invention could have haphazardly bring down a steel framed skyscraper down in 1938, why not put a bigger, more sophisticated apparatus to to work in 2001. I'm not a physicist. I don't know if this is even feasible. I couldn't even tell you how it works. And I'm not suggesting this type of technology was used to the exclusion of all else. But I do know that there is a lot of technology that we are not aware of that could have been put to work on that day - in conjunction with the explosives and the thermate - which I'm pretty sure they did use.

I've read about painting on the thermate. There is also a supposed eyewitness who claims that it was integrated into the towers when they were built; although the explosives could have been placed at any time. There are plenty of reports that suggest an inordinate amount of "construction workers" coming in and out of the towers in the months and weeks before they fell; including the powerdown on the weekend before 9/11 documented by Scott Forbes. Although I was suspicious from the start, it took me a year to understand that it definitely wasn't OBL and his suicidal henchmen that did it (although that is an interesting part of the story). That's how smart I am.

There are people who have narrowed it down to who probably did it, and probably how. A few have even said it out loud. But, the legal system, the courts, the media and most of the population have proved to be unresponsive to the truth. When we read in the history books about what happened on that day, you know what they will say: 19 hijackers...

Every few years a revelatory new theory will sweep the Internet and sometimes even make it on TV, where it will be discredited. I've done plenty of research and I still find this topic interesting, but down deep I moved on a long time ago. I only wanted to impart to this discussion an idea that I had left hanging; as it occurred to me when I saw the title of this thread.

I'm not trying to waste anybody's time. Believe it or not, I was trying to add to the discussion. I completely understand if someone more well versed in physics doesn't comes forward to briefly evaluate the Tesla resonator theory. Maybe it is ridiculous. Maybe this isn't the place to discuss it. I don't know. I was just wondering.

Now, I wonder if any new technologies have emerged as a result of what somebody learned on 9/11? Seeing the results of what happened that day, perhaps flying planes into buildings is the best way to raze them. Have they tried that lately?

Sorry again. Sometimes it's better not to just blurt out what I'm thinking.

Carry on.

Oh yeah. Happy New Year!

[Uncle $cam]

@ chump

I think dbcooper41's remarks of, "so back to our story" has to do w/ mine and Wombat's exchange. Hence my reluctance to reply specifically to my screed. Which very well, may have been out of place. As for the topic, I'm ambivalent on the CD theory, I do think it's important, but as others have suggested, and I whole heartedly agree, we have more than enough avenues of evidence to walk down wrt stock market shenanigans to find the real story, if only our DOJ wasn't compromised to the point of abject corruption. I suspect, It's not [just]"follow the money" [anymore] but rather "follow the money --and this is important-- and follow the status of the job or social position. It is rumored (and I don't doubt this) that Cheneyco, now has sleeper cells in place in key positions. Not that the Demorats are any better.

Hence all the strategic powerful job placements with people who have no experience other than the same ideology as the mayberry Machivellis or the inner elite. All with their own agenda. F*cking Alan (Rand) Greenspan etc... Finally, for example, The Riggs Bank (j. Bush) info dovetails with Sibel Edmonds' allegations very nicely.

[Nordic]

Okay, do I have to say it out loud? We've got a guy named David Griffin who heroically cleaned up the 9/11 site and was buddies with all the VIP's of NY ....

Then we've got a David Griffin who's possibly the best known 9/11 debunker?

That's just too weird for words. Right?

David H. Griffin

David Ray Griffin

[chump]

Okay, do I have to say it out loud? We've got a guy named David Griffin who heroically cleaned up the 9/11 site and was buddies with all the VIP's of NY ....

Then we've got a David Griffin who's possibly the best known 9/11 debunker?

That's just too weird for words. Right?

David H. Griffin

David Ray Griffin

Not the same guy, right?

[Maddy]

I couldn't find either the thread or the You Tube videos. Searching here is insane, and You Tube has far too many videos on this subject. But I do remember it and it was really an awesome analagy! It was about the Pentagon, not the WTC. The guy was talking to witnesses and had all kinds of ground shots and everything. Pity I have such a sucky memory.

[chump]

I couldn't find either the thread or the You Tube videos. Searching here is insane, and You Tube has far too many videos on this subject. But I do remember it and it was really an awesome analagy! It was about the Pentagon, not the WTC. The guy was talking to witnesses and had all kinds of ground shots and everything. Pity I have such a sucky memory.

Is this it?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... en&view=3#

[Nordic]

Okay, do I have to say it out loud? We've got a guy named David Griffin who heroically cleaned up the 9/11 site and was buddies with all the VIP's of NY ....

Then we've got a David Griffin who's possibly the best known 9/11 debunker?

That's just too weird for words. Right?

David H. Griffin

David Ray Griffin

Not the same guy, right?

No, not even remotely (pun subconsciously intended?)

It's just one of those too-weird synchronicities of 9/11. Either that or a HMW type of keyword hijacking also utilizing a time machine.

[barracuda]

Yeah, because "David Griffin" is such a strange and unusual name in this country.

[Nordic]

Yeah, because "David Griffin" is such a strange and unusual name in this country.

Oh, come on. It's not THAT common. One supposedly a hero of 9/11, the other a debunker?

It's weird.

[dbcooper41]

"Mr. Cooper, in response to the first half of your OP, I'd have to say that is a bit weak. The demolition in question, of a 48 meter tall concrete tower,........."

barracuda, if this had been intended as hard evidence then yes, it is weak. but i'm not saying this is how they did it or even that these people were involved. i'm just telling "unusual" stories, using webpages to set the scene.
and yes, there is a huge difference in a 48 meter structure and a 400 meter structure. of course you could break it down into 10 zones.
no hard evidence will ever be found in this investigation so all we can do is speculate.
there is a little more to this story.

[barracuda]

I understand. I'm just throwing it out there in response, not as any "refutation" of your OP, but as conversation.

[Canadian_watcher]

I'm glad someone said it, thanks Nordic.

That is weird.

For a moment I thought - Holy Shit! How did I not know this about David Ray Griffin....? But just for a moment..